W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: Path to Last Call (was closing various issues)

From: William Loughborough <wloughborough@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:16:48 -0700
Message-ID: <1e3451610908230816t6768f4bbif54352ff707e68c5@mail.gmail.com>
To: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, public-canvas-api@w3.org
I wonder when quite valid concerns of this sort will be unimaginable?

How is it possible at this late date in the saga of "everyone connected"
that "just for accessibility reasons" is even a consideration?

The almost undeniable fact that this particular item being "likely not going
to happen" reflects very badly on us all. Are we really saying something
like "have mercy on the poor beleaguered developers for being imposed upon
by being "required" to do something "just for accessibility"?

"Oh, why must we *force* authors to do alt-text well, it's just for
accessibility, isn't it? Perhaps if we can show some 'business case' for it,
we can get it done."


On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Steven Faulkner

> it is the creation of the shadow dom objects that concerns me, if it is the
> case that developers are required to create this in addition (just for
> accessibility reasons) then it is very likely not going to happen, but if it
> had utility beyond just accessibility then it would be used.
Received on Sunday, 23 August 2009 15:17:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:54 UTC